It would take a long time for water to evaporate out of any crevices, so the liquid would stay around a long time, any probe measuring steam quality has to do it from below 100 C and above 100 C.
but this is all moot. Galantini used the wrong instrument. I can't find the amount of grams per kg of air at 100 C. But I did find that air at 50 C and 100% humidity has about 95 grams of water per kg of Air. This is a ratio of 10%. See chart here: http://www.conradaskland.com/blog/2007/07/humidity-effects-on-tuning-and-intonation/ so at 100 C I'd expect there to be something like 300 or 400 grams of water per kg of air (that's 30% to 40% which I find amazing!) Problem is the Ecat puts out microscopic liquid droplets (i.e. fog) and water vapor. The humidity meter Galantini used is designed for humidity in AIR! The Ecat does not put out any air. Steam quality requires a complex expensive instrument. It can be done by expanding pressurized steam into a chamber and measuring the resulting temperature of the vapor. For this method to work, all the water has to vaporize during the expansion which requires an adequate pressure change. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Mark Iverson <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote: > Michele wrote: > "Condense on the probe? What is the temperature of the probe? > 100° C or > less? > Galantini would not make such a mistake..." > > Exactly... As soon as the probe was placed in the steam flow, some > condensation would occur on it, > but within seconds the probe would heat up and the condensation will > evaporate. > > -Mark > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michele Comitini [mailto:michele.comit...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 1:19 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:relative humidity > > 2011/6/22 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com>: > >> The problem with this is that water would condense on the probe. You >> would always see 100% liquid water, if this is how it's being >> detected, unless you preheated the probe. Tricky. There are >> descriptions on-line of how to measure steam quality, and this approach is >> not mentioned at all. > > Condense on the probe? What is the temperature of the probe? > 100° C or > less? > Galantini would not make such a mistake... > >> >>> When you ask for tech specs of instruments used by people that know >>> how to make good experiments search for the physical principles that >>> is behind the measure not the range or the main field of application >>> of an instrument. I bet Galantini knows how that probe works inside quite >>> well. >> >> He might and he might not. It depends on his specific experience. He >> might have never made a measurement like this before, though he would >> certainly understand the physics; he might simply assume that g/m^3 >> referred to liquid water, without thinking much about it. > > So we should think Galantini setup instruments picking up the first probe > without understanding how > it works. > Or he always makes this kind of mesures just to fool people? > >> >> Do you see his actual measured values anywhere? Seems to me I saw >> something somewhere. >> > I recall that something is on JONP... no time to search in that mess. > > mic > >
